An Adaptive Augmented Vision-Based Ellipsoidal SLAM for Indoor Environments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, the problem of Simultaneous Localization And Mapping (SLAM) is addressed via a novel augmented landmark vision-based ellipsoidal SLAM. The algorithm is implemented on a NAO humanoid robot and is tested in an indoor environment. The main feature of the system is the implementation of SLAM with a monocular vision system. Distinguished landmarks referred to as NAOmarks are employed to localize the robot via its monocular vision system. We henceforth introduce the notion of robotic augmented reality (RAR) and present a monocular Extended Kalman Filter (EKF)/ellipsoidal SLAM in order to improve the performance and alleviate the computational effort, to provide landmark identification, and to simplify the data association problem. The proposed SLAM algorithm is implemented in real-time to further calibrate the ellipsoidal SLAM parameters, noise bounding, and to improve its overall accuracy. The augmented EKF/ellipsoidal SLAM algorithms are compared with the regular EKF/ellipsoidal SLAM methods and the merits of each algorithm is also discussed in the paper. The real-time experimental and simulation studies suggest that the adaptive augmented ellipsoidal SLAM is more accurate than the conventional EKF/ellipsoidal SLAMs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".